Antarctic melting

Some good could arise from all this I suppose. Interest may be stimulated for some folks to understand how (and how well mixed) the troposphere actually is. Might have learned and forgotten it in school, because who cares, right?

Yet it is on the list of things one had really better understand, to have any hope of navigating earth system science. Because you care, right?

After getting basics of how troposphere mixes, you will be in a much better position to understand why some gases and particles are better mixed than others. It boils down to localization of their sources and sinks.

There can be (and was) a lethal bubble of CO2 over Lake Nyos. But it could only happen on a windless night, when mixing was briefly, locally prevented.

Missing the basics can cause you all sorts of trouble. It may have contributed to mojo not seeing evidence that he and fuzzy1 presented.

The basics aren't that hard either. As sort of a New Year's resolution, I hope that when people read here something that just seems odd, don't just say "that seems odd". Let it lead you towards a better personal understanding.

 

Part of what people buy with their billion-dollar research grants is CO2 sensors. Some folks put them on towers to obtain vertical profiles. It really gets interesting in valleys on cool, clear nights. Then colder air accumulates near the surface and gets 'capped'. One can measure very high [CO2] in these accumulations. It really is wow. But when the sun comes up mixing resumes.

I bet many here have flown over the Appalachian area early AM. All the valley filled with 'radiation fog'. CO2 there as well.

Our eyes are not optimized to observe atmospheric mixing. It can be known by other means.

 

I learned something surprising by plotting South Pole [O2] and CO2. Data from Scripps.

The CO2 units are familiar parts per million, which is absolute (zero means zero). O2 units are relative changes per million molecules (zero means whatever [O2] was at some defined prior starting point). Not surprising that they are opposite because burning consumes O2 as well as producing CO2. But even here is enough to understand that +CO2 is not coming from degassing warming oceans.

But I digress. The interesting thing is that O2 annual variations are larger than those of CO2. The units are difficult to directly compare, but here they are scaled same over the entire range. This suggests that, for whatever reason, oxygen is not as well mixed in the South Pole surface atmosphere as is CO2. That was unexpected, and might even merit an email to the Scripps people. One would first want to do the same for other sampling locations (Mauna Loa, Alert, Scripps Pier, etc.).

It ought to be clear that causes of annual variation in these gases are happening far from the South Pole (somewhere biological). So in this most remote place, nothing is better mixed than CO2. Wow, and as so often, I would not have looked except for…well, you know.

 

Larsen-C is about to become unzipped

Huge Antarctic iceberg poised to break away - BBC News

Which is sure to make some news. Just bear in mind that it is already supported by buoyant forces and is not a sea-level raiser.

However, grounded ice inland of there may accelerate downhill. It would be a good time to put some sort of survey markers (or GPS?) in place to detect changes. I reckon the ice folks have already thought of that.

 

Lake Powell annual average level since construction


Lake Mead annual average level since construction



Good thing that the (mostly smaller) Calif. reservoirs have refilled.

 

Gulf Stream@54. Study is an a 300-year time scale. It is based on a model of course. Interestingly, people who disparage warming models are flocking to this one about regional cooling.

Even forgetting 'that movie' it is not an entirely new idea:
Gulf Stream weakened in 'Little Ice Age' : Nature News

 

Reservoirs@53. Had to like this because the cited page provides almost enough info to assess claims:

"Reservoirs are mostly above average" @50
"Reservoirs will be full after this week" @53

Missing are the capacities, expressed (USA preference) in Acre-feet (AF). I made a spreadsheet. Capacity of all those Calif. reservoirs combined is nearly 21 million AF. Present stored water is almost 12.2 million AF. That is 88% of average values, thus not mostly above.

It is also 58% of system capacity. To fill them in a week would require 9.8 million AF. Any hydrologist would be sadly amused by such an assertion.

But the cdec web page is great.

+++
The 2 Colorado R. reservoirs I mentioned have combined capacity of 50.2 million AF. They currently contain 21.8 million AF; 43.5% of capacity.

Western water storage is either half full or half empty. Your choice. Here was the wrong (titled) place to have this discussion but I'm glad we had it anyway.

 

Four (of 12) Calif. reservoirs are currently above historical average values - Don Pedro, McClure, Millerton and Trinity. No idea why that is so, but those reservoirs’ historical average storage values are low compared to their capacities.

Calif. water managers probably have reasons to keep some reservoirs higher, and others lower through time. I doubt that misleading careless readers is among those reasons.

You might conclude that the lesson is ‘don’t be careless’, but not entirely so. One careless student, after correction, teaches the whole class. I actually think it’s pretty neat. Hard on the one, but he has repeatedly proven his durability.

 

Four (of 12) Calif. reservoirs are currently above historical average values - Don Pedro, McClure, Millerton and Trinity. No idea why that is so, but those reservoirs’ historical average storage values are low compared to their capacities.

Calif. water managers probably have reasons to keep some reservoirs higher, and others lower through time. I doubt that misleading careless readers is among those reasons.

You might conclude that the lesson is ‘don’t be careless’, but not entirely so. One careless student, after correction, teaches the whole class. I actually think it’s pretty neat. Hard on the one, but he has repeatedly proven his durability.